question on student taxi practice

"William Snow" wrote in
:

The long and short of it is very simple.

What: Taxi
Why: To maneuver the airplane on the ground from the parking area to
the takeoff area, maintenance area or fueling area.
How: See the PTS.

It is NOT common practice to allow a presolo student to taxi around
the airport, thereby increasing traffic, and increasing risk for all
others unnecessarily. It may be legal but it is not wise.

What happened to judgment?

You seem to find judgement easily...

But based on what? You don't have enough facts to make that judgement.

You don't know whether or not a student is qualified to taxi an aircraft
safely just because he is not yet qualified to land it safely.

I agree that it would seem to be a non-standard practice, but is it
representative of a lack of judgement? I could envision scenarios where it
was representative of good judgement. Your conclusions are faulty.

"Jose" wrote in message
t...
Earth to Jose... HELLLOOO... those individuals get special training and
are licensed to perform aircraft surface movement operations within the
constraints of their job functions, and within limited areas.

Right. And they are not (necessarily) legal to fly an airplane solo
around the pattern. How much "special training" do you think it would
take Joe Mechanic before he can taxi a 150 safely from the tiedowns to the
service area, which is across the runway and down the taxiway a bit?

Not much.

My guess it would take all of 15 or 20 minutes. It seems some people think
taxiing the typical trainer airplane is akin to brain surgery, In fact it's
more like riding a tricycle.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 12:36:20 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

You can't get a little pregnant, neither can you almost fly
an airplane

Actually, that's exactly how the French taught flying in WWI, and
therefore how most American pilots learned to fly. They employed a
"Penguin" that could taxi but not fly. You got in, taxied like crazy
across a field, turned it around, and the guy on the other side
stepped in and taxied back, and so on until everyone had had a turn.

I suppose the idea was to save money and not have the student pilots
tie up an actual airplane (and risk pranging it) while they learned to
taxi -- a considerable skill in a taildragger.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 17:59:54 GMT, ktbr wrote:

In fact, in order to be signed off for solo operation, the student has
to be trained in almost every aspect and subject covered by the PP PTS.

And at my airport the student had to show proof of insurance. It was
$15K then; it's $40K now.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

Dave Stadt wrote:

My guess it would take all of 15 or 20 minutes. It seems some people think
taxiing the typical trainer airplane is akin to brain surgery, In fact it's
more like riding a tricycle.

Easy for some, harder for others. I think driving a car is pretty easy too but
its still requires a learner permit at minimum (requiring a licensed driver present)
to operate the vehicle on any public roads. I have seen licensed pilots unable
to put an airplane squarely into a tiedown spot.... repeatedly. Perhaps they lack
the skill to really master the plane (scarey), perhaps they were poorly trained....

The reason is simple.. until you have reached a point of demonstrating ability
to safely master the control of the [insert whatever machine you want in here]
and have received a license/signoff/endorsement for solo operation you are a
potential accident... no matter how "easy" it seems to some people, or how smart
you think you are.

I'm sure Peter Duniho (being the most capable and knowledgable pilot to ever
have taken flight) could safely taxi an F-15 when he was six with 10 minutes
of training. For most people, learning to taxi an airplane SAFELY takes some
training and experience.

Peter Duniho wrote:
Whoopee. Lots of CFIs don't have their facts straight.

Boy, I'm so glad we have YOU to set us all straight Peter.

There are several areas of the FARs where particular activities/actions
etc. are not specifically mentioned as "prohibited" but neither are
they specifically authorized or sanctioned. The FAA issues Advisory
Circulars to clarify their positions on losts of these sorts of subjects,
often stating positions which to some may seem at odds with the wording
of the FARs. In most cases they seem to come down on the side of more
restrictive than what the casual reader may glean from reading the FAR.

You can be assured that in the event of an accident/violation etc. that
the FAA will come down as holding the CFI (or whatever party supposedly
authorized/sanctioned the questionable activity) as being culpable.
Safety and good judgement is one of the criteria used to determine the
cause of incident and thats what that is emphasized to much to CFIs, as
they are to instill this into their students.

But I don't need to tell you this because you already know it all.

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
Dave Stadt wrote:

My guess it would take all of 15 or 20 minutes. It seems some people
think taxiing the typical trainer airplane is akin to brain surgery, In
fact it's more like riding a tricycle.

Easy for some, harder for others. I think driving a car is pretty easy too
but
its still requires a learner permit at minimum (requiring a licensed
driver present)
to operate the vehicle on any public roads. I have seen licensed pilots
unable
to put an airplane squarely into a tiedown spot.... repeatedly. Perhaps
they lack
the skill to really master the plane (scarey), perhaps they were poorly
trained....

But they have the certificate which by your implication below makes them
accident proof..

The reason is simple.. until you have reached a point of demonstrating
ability
to safely master the control of the [insert whatever machine you want in
here]
and have received a license/signoff/endorsement for solo operation you are
a
potential accident... no matter how "easy" it seems to some people, or how
smart
you think you are.

So you believe receiving a license/signoff/endorsement means you are no
longer a potential accident. Interesting, I wasn't aware a signature or a
piece of paper had that ability.

I'm sure Peter Duniho (being the most capable and knowledgable pilot to
ever
have taken flight) could safely taxi an F-15 when he was six with 10
minutes
of training. For most people, learning to taxi an airplane SAFELY takes
some
training and experience.

No one has denied that but face facts, taxiing a 152 in normal conditions
does not take much training for the average Joe or Judy.

"Nomen Nescio" wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

From: "Dudley Henriques"

I had almost accepted hitting the cow and trying to put the airplane down
somehow between the two buildings as I was yelling at lead to give me some
air.

There's a "$100 hamburger" joke in there, somewhere.

Yeah, but it's a tossup who would have been the hamburger; the cow, or me.
:-))
Dudley Henriques

Student pilot, 2 hours dual given, Piper Cub, goes out to
practice taxiing on a paved uncontrolled airport. Wind is
calm at 9:30 AM, at 9:45 the wind picks up to 20G35.....
you be the judge about student pilot skill.

Same conditions, except Cessna 152, student pilot still is
in trouble.

The skills needed to safely taxi an airplane include weather
and forecasts, control positioning, having the wing tips and
tail miss contacting other airplanes, not killing people who
may walk into the area, radio monitoring and perhaps
talking, hand, foot and eye coordination....

Airplanes designed by Ted Smith use nosewheel steering, but
not in a standard way, some are steered by electrical
switches mounted on the panel, some by holding the rudders
still and tapping the brakes. Some planes have steerable
tailwheels, some have toe brakes and some have heel brakes.
Learjets, Beechjets and Boeings are different too.

If a student pilot needs "practice" in the "simple art of
taxiing" they need a CFI present until they are ready to
solo.
see http://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/sample/taxi.html
for a eye-opener which also opened a fuel tank.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.




"Cub Driver" usenet AT danford DOT net wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 12:36:20 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
| wrote:
|
| You can't get a little pregnant, neither can you almost
fly
| an airplane
|
| Actually, that's exactly how the French taught flying in
WWI, and
| therefore how most American pilots learned to fly. They
employed a
| "Penguin" that could taxi but not fly. You got in, taxied
like crazy
| across a field, turned it around, and the guy on the other
side
| stepped in and taxied back, and so on until everyone had
had a turn.
|
| I suppose the idea was to save money and not have the
student pilots
| tie up an actual airplane (and risk pranging it) while
they learned to
| taxi -- a considerable skill in a taildragger.
|
|
| -- all the best, Dan Ford
|
| email: usenet AT danford DOT net
|
| Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
| Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
| In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
Boy, I'm so glad we have YOU to set us all straight Peter.

It seems that for now, you are the only person in need of setting straight.
No one else is claiming to know of hidden regulations prohibiting a
non-pilot from taxiing an airplane.

There are several areas of the FARs where particular activities/actions
etc. are not specifically mentioned as "prohibited" but neither are
they specifically authorized or sanctioned.

Such as?

The FAA issues Advisory
Circulars to clarify their positions on losts of these sorts of subjects,
often stating positions which to some may seem at odds with the wording
of the FARs.

Are you claiming there's an AC that prohibits a non-pilot from taxiing an
airplane?

In most cases they seem to come down on the side of more
restrictive than what the casual reader may glean from reading the FAR.

You can be assured that in the event of an accident/violation etc. that
the FAA will come down as holding the CFI (or whatever party supposedly
authorized/sanctioned the questionable activity) as being culpable.

Assured by whom?

I assume you have documentation to support your claim? Where is it
prohibited for a student (or anyone else without a pilot certificate)
without a solo endorsement to taxi an airplane?

Safety and good judgement is one of the criteria used to determine the
cause of incident and thats what that is emphasized to much to CFIs, as
they are to instill this into their students.

Safety and good judgment are both good things. So what? There's lots of
stuff that's legal but unsafe or in poor judgment.

But I don't need to tell you this because you already know it all.

I appreciate your support.

Pete